Madden NFL 15: Top Rookies

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by ggsimmonds

One of the things about ratings is how EA manipulates overalls by adjusting individual attributes. My go to example is Joe Flacco. Look back a few seasons ago and check his arm strength. Then check it after he won SB MVP. Then check what it was on the last update this past season. Has his arm strength changed? Of course not. EA raises or lowers his THP to achieve a desired overall. Of course they do this for several players, I just cite Joe because I am a Ravens fan and his overall fluctuates frequently. Ray Rice's speed is another example. EA/Moore have a preconceived overall in mind for each player so they tweak attributes to reach that goal or. This is bad for two reasons. First it is manipulation and I don't like that. Second it should tell them there is a problem with Madden's ratings if when they give guys what they believe to be accurate ratings does not result in accurate results. Hopefully the new change in gameplay mindset will lead to a change in rating philosophy.

I once tried to rate players solely on their individual attributes, being the most realistic way to grade a player. Once the calculated OVR ratings went up, my inbox was flooded with hate-mail about how Wes Welker should be a 95 and not a 75 because he is not the most athletic guy out there...just very savvy and played with two of the best QBs to ever play the game.

[michiganfan8620]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

Completely disagree here. Rookies should have those ratings warranted when they EARN THEM. NOT before their first season starts! They haven't even entered camp yet (except for the Bills)! I would prefer, in CFM, to have REALISTIC physical attributes and then build on them with XP going to honing the skills...you know...LIKE IN REAL LIFE. From this day forward, for every season accrued, these players will get slower, less agile, less twitchy, and even less strong as their bodies deteriorate over time. What is it that keeps the good ones in the game? THEIR TECHNICAL SKILLS! They learn to amass so much knowledge and technique, that they can overcome their physical regression with better technique and training. Do you think Jerry Rice was productive in Oakland because he still ran a 4.58? He was productive because he was easily the smartest, most experienced player on the field who could turn blanket coverage by a corner's raw ability into a 5 yard deficit by running a route at 99% accuracy. But instead, we can increase speed, agility, yada, yada, yada. The data I have shows that teams grade rookies very low and after, and ONLY after they prove their worth, do their grades go up. NOT before they even play one competitive snap against the best in the world! EA's logic is BACKWARD. Rate them as they are NOW, not what you "think" they "may" be in the future. Nobody has a crystal ball and that is why we get draft busts. Let these guys prove it first!

The problem is, CFM would likely be broken then. Rookies would be at a massive disadvantage, as none of them would likely develop properly compared to the other young players who have played a year. Then we'd have people complaining about that. It's a lose-lose situation.

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by charter04

Dan, the guy who runs FBG ratings had an interview for that job and they asked if he would alter ratings if an EA exec wanted him to for different reasons. I believe that is the reason he didn't take or whatever. They know all about his site. I just think these ratings have become a monster that won't change. I think they don't want to offend players too much. People look at them like it's the official ratings. I'm not even sure he he uses the scouting data that FBG ratings uses that costs a lot of money to get. Stuff NFL teams use. I mean doesn't anyone think NFL teams get their data from NFL.com?

You know those combine times that NFL Network and NFL.com posts in "real time", live on your TV? A guy with a stopwatch in the stands does those.

You know how much 30 of the 32 teams pay for the official combine data made available a full WEEK after the combine is over? 80k. You can guess what teams won't pay for them by looking at their not-so-rosy histories with the league.

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by charter04

I will say this about Donny Moore. He seems like a good guy and seems to work hard and love e his job. I just think he's in a lose lose situation. Some will complain the ratings are too high while others appalled that they are too low. I don't want his job I'll tell you that. Lol I just feel he uses a faulty way to rate. Seems like watching games, you tube scouting, NFL.com "official" combine numbers, and outside pressure is his total method. It just makes the gameplay less realistic and more arcade, no matter how good a job the gameplay guys do.

I do. I would love his job. Too bad he gets hamstrung by his own execs.

[michiganfan8620]

Quote: Originally Posted by charter04

Dan, the guy who runs FBG ratings had an interview for that job and they asked if he would alter ratings if an EA exec wanted him to for different reasons. I believe that is the reason he didn't take or whatever. They know all about his site. I just think these ratings have become a monster that won't change. I think they don't want to offend players too much. People look at them like it's the official ratings. I'm not even sure he he uses the scouting data that FBG ratings uses that costs a lot of money to get. Stuff NFL teams use. I mean doesn't anyone think NFL teams get their data from NFL.com?

He uses his own sources for data. Just because he doesn't use what FBG uses doesn't mean he's wrong. And you act like the data FBG uses is something EA can't afford. And the data on nfl.com is official from the combine. And I doubt NFL teams use what FBG uses, if whatever it is even exists. NFL teams make their own individual evaluations, which is what they pay scouts for.

[charter04]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

I once tried to rate players solely on their individual attributes, being the most realistic way to grade a player. Once the calculated OVR ratings went up, my inbox was flooded with hate-mail about how Wes Welker should be a 95 and not a 75 because he is not the most athletic guy out there...just very savvy and played with two of the best QBs to ever play the game.

That's actually still my favorite ratings. I still have the 360 version of those. They play great. Welker is still very productive in the game at 75.

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by michiganfan8620

The problem is, CFM would likely be broken then. Rookies would be at a massive disadvantage, as none of them would likely develop properly compared to the other young players who have played a year. Then we'd have people complaining about that. It's a lose-lose situation.

Are you telling me that the developers can't come up with a way to make rookies develop FASTER than a 10 year veteran because they are younger, often have less of an injury history, and don't yet have massively declining skills? Maybe something like only being allowed to use a certain amount of XP on a player due to their age, potential, and injury history?

Wow. Could have sworn that Madden used to be able to do that in like Madden 2003, where you see guys advance quickly as rookies, and then less and less as they grow older. But that was 12 years ago, when Madden was actually pretty good and innovative, it's probably impossible now.

[charter04]

Quote: Originally Posted by michiganfan8620

He uses his own sources for data. Just because he doesn't use what FBG uses doesn't mean he's wrong. And you act like the data FBG uses is something EA can't afford. And the data on nfl.com is official from the combine. And I doubt NFL teams use what FBG uses, if whatever it is even exists. NFL teams make their own individual evaluations, which is what they pay scouts for.

NFL.com is not official. Lol you just keep believing what you want. Since this is the EA ratings thread I'm going to end it at that. For more discussion on the fbg ratings go to that thread. I go to the site that uses the same info he uses all the time. He probably has the link.